Intel Releases Core i7-2700K Processor

[buymagicfish]

Anyone hazard a guess as to when the i3-2120 will hit $117? Still at $140 at all the major online retailers. How long before the prices change when CPU prices are adjusted by the manufacturer?

 

[captaincharisma]

AMD will not die, they just have lots of catching up to do...

yea they been trying to catch up ever since intel released the first core CPU's almost 5 years ago :lol:

 

[wislam]

[citation][nom]rendroid15[/nom]if bulldozer would have been a better product, i bet core i3 would be around $ 75.[/citation]

That's not quite true.
Intel pushes products not only on their technology, but mostly on their image and reputation as being "Intel".

Thus, it's hard to see their products ever really competing with AMD in terms of pricing - because they know regular consumers who buy PC's are most likely to go with a highly marketed brand like Intel.
And of course, AMD being the good guys they are, they always price their products lower.

This is also why I find the entire Sandy Bridge line of products quite amazing (and a little suspicious), because of amazing performance, and yet for the first time (well, sort of), Intel competing with a good price.

Otherwise, I was expecting Sandy Bridge to be at the standard Intel pricing of around $999 and reducing (about now) to around $500.
e.g. Intel i7 970/980.

 

[wislam]

[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]People cry too much about AMD getting sodomized and what will happen when they go under.Intel would still have to innovate, because they'd be competing with themselves. If their CPUs are only 20% faster, who's going to want the new one? You'd kill your upgrade cycle, and they'd also lose server sales. Remember, there are many competitors there and its the same architecture.Pointing to the Pentium 4 as Intel being complacent is one of the dumbest things people keep saying. The Pentium 4 was an EXTREMELY advanced processor with some of the greatest innovations seen in a processor. It just didn't work well when everything was put together because of other issues (like the weak decoding). Also, what makes Sandy Bridge so good? Well, it's the Pentium 4 technology that is now part of it. It's not a Pentium Pro derivative anymore, it's got tons of Pentium 4 DNA, finally used to good effect. Pentium 4 sucked, but not because Intel was complacent, or wasn't advancing technology. We're seeing how good that technology was in Sandy Bridge. Other decisions they made with the product made all the good in it, not so good.[/citation]

Very interesting, thanks for this!
And I completely agree that Intel is a competitor to itself more so than to AMD.

With regards to P4 - I always assumed Sandy Bridge was an excellent product due to the innovations from the Core architecture, and some of the goodness from Nehalem?

I do also agree though that Pentium 4 was an innovative and risky step for Intel.

 

[wislam]

[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]excuses excuses. AMD wanted this chip to be the chip for gamers and enthusiests[/citation]

... errr, what?

Where are you getting this from?

I always assumed Bulldozer was primarily due to where the desktop is heading (highly multi-threaded + multimedia apps) + mostly for the server market?

 

[Guest]

Still don't see a reason for slapping down the extra $$$'s on a 2600K/2700K. 2500K is still the price/performance champ.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Still don't see a reason for slapping down the extra $$$'s on a 2600K/2700K. 2500K is still the price/performance champ.

I wanted the hyper-threading of the 2600K for video transcoding, and I'm probably not the only one.

 

[de5_Roy]

kitguru tested a 2700k and reached 5000 mhz on air with 1.5 vcore. apparently it also has higher average turbo speed, stays on 3.9 ghz on all cores (could be the asus board's doing).
it dominated fx8150 in both speed and power consumption.